MQA according to new Stereophile "loudness button" and "tweaking EQ in presence region"

Stereophile’s May 2017 review of the Mytek Brooklyn DAC (Herb Reichert) states that "in every comparison, MQA made the original recording sound more dynamic and transparent, but only sometimes more temporaly precise."

Seems positive, right? But the next sentence reads....

"After a while the MQA versions began to remind me of those old Loudness Contour buttons on 1960’s receivers, which used equalization to compensate for loss of treble and bass at low listening levels."

Now for the bombshell.....

"Consistently, MQA sounded as though it was tweaking the EQ in the presence region."

"I also noticed that most of the MQA versions sounded rounded off and smoother than the originals."

My opinion is that we gullible audiophiles have been fooled in the past by supposed new technologies, similar to what supposedly early mobile fidelity pressings did with EQ to make listeners think they were hearing an improvement.

In my mind, an alteration of the source is distortion.

Just as TV’S in stores set to torch mode are often preferred on first glance, and speakers that at first grab you with some spectacular aspect can become tiresome over time, as accuracy and neutrality become preferred as one's ear becomes more refined.

The frightening thing is that 2 major music entities have signed on, seemingly to make MQA the defacto standard of how music will made available.

While I haven’t been able to do this comparison myself, reading a highly regarded golden ear admit this in print is warning enough for me.

Just like the sugary drink that tastes so good on first experience, our advanced society knows that consuming it regularly leads to diabetes, heart disease and worse.

Does this revelation reveal MQA to be the parlor trick that it appears to be?
It is also possible that what is being heard is the performance of the Brooklyn dac and not MQA.  So far all my experiences with MQA are very positive both with a Meridian Explorer2 with full MQA decoding or with my Master 7 using partial decoding from the Tidal player. We still need more MQA files from UMG and Sony for further evaluation. Just last week I had a conversation with Robert Harley and he likes MQA a lot.The gentleman above who comments on MQA without ever hearing it is typical of many of the negative comments. Listen to it and then comment. It will give some credibility to your comments.
I haven't heard a full blown MQA setup, but listening to Tidal's Masters with their version of MQA is quite seductive.Call it a parlor trick or whatever, the sound is still extremely good. Do all recordings sound good with MQA? No, not really, but the majority of those that do are quite good. The reviewer can have his opinion, but relying on just his opinion about a music medium is no better than totally relying on his opinion about an audio component. If you haven't listened to MQA, you should really give it a try before condemning it due to a reviewer's suspicions. Sometimes you have to take off your "purist cap" and just sit down and listen to the beauty of the music that MQA can bring.
" Just like the sugary drink that tastes so good on first experience, our advanced society knows that consuming it regularly leads to diabetes, heart disease and worse."

First of all, when it comes to buying anything audio related, the most qualified person to judge products is you.

As for the golden ears, next time we have a big marker correction and you're hungry, don't cut off the ears. Knock some teeth out instead. Its the only way to get precious metals out of them.
This also reminds me of so many signal processor boxes that were touted as improving ones system.  How many of those are still being used today.  
The emperor's new line of clothes. It sounds like audio comfort food for those who don't like the real thing. Tweak it, massage it, and fiddle with it 'till it sounds pleasing to the ears.

Add some hype and licensing fees and Bob's your rich uncle.

All the best,